Marcuse: Reason and Revolution

Status
Not open for further replies.

RamistThomist

Puritanboard Clerk
Marcuse, Herbert. Reason and Revolution.

Marcuse was not a Christian. He was a demon in human flesh. But his importance for 20th century cultural revolutionism is too important to be dismissed. This is why the Left is much more dangerous today than 20 years ago. His ideas went to seed and then bloomed.

Marcuse outlines Hegel’s thought and suggests how it informed the later rise of social theory and critical theory. The book is a fine exposition of Hegel and Marx. It suffers, however, by rarely attaching the two. Therefore, the subtitle should actually read “Hegel + The Rise of Social Theory.”

For Hegel Reason functions as an acid-drip, dissolving all historical forms, leading to the liberation of nature. As Marcuse says, it is a “task,” not a fact (Marcuse 26). [Reviewer's note: this is why many SJWs say that reason is a tool of the white man to oppress Facebook's 58 genders. Seriously. Philosopher John Caputo said exactly that]. While many repeat Hegel’s famous dictum that the Real is the Rational, Marcuse points out that reason will dissolve social orders via its inherent negativity, which will then usher in new forms of the rational.

The progress of thought begins when we try to grasp the structure of Being. But when we do this, Being dissolves into many quantities and qualities, which are actually a totality of antagonistic relations. This is the essence of Being. Therefore, Being is antagonistic. Indeed, Being is *violent.* Reality is violent.

Hegel’s thought allows a visible dynamic between reason, externality, and alienation (as famously seen in Marx). Through labor man overcomes the estrangement between the objective world and the subjective world. Man is alienated when he is subordinated to abstract labor. Mechanization facilitates this alienation.

Alienation of the person: the person externalizes himself and becomes an object. I can sell my time and labor. Marcuse, like Marx earlier, sees that many of Hegel’s conclusions, lead to antagonisms and clashes in society (196). However, in Hegel’s society, as Marx would later note, people participate and share only on the basis of Capital, which itself will create more inequalities (205).

The second half of the book is a skillful analysis of Marx and later sociologists. This has been covered in-depth by other writers, so there is no need to review it here. The book succeeds as an excellent analysis of Hegel, yet it seems about 100 pages too long.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top